OK, having done some digging; this project seems to be often referred to or
introduced as a WMUK project.
(e.g. this Wikimania video:
*)*
*
*
Obviously that is a concerning facet that needs to be cleared up also.
Tom
On 17 September 2012 23:18, Thomas Morton <morton.thomas(a)googlemail.com>wrote;wrote:
Clearly what is needed, with some urgency is:
* A clear statement from Roger as to what renumeration he is receiving,
and what agreements he has in place with the Gibraltar tourist board etc.
This will go to clearing up the confusion.
* A clear statement about WMUK's intended involvement with this process.
* Roger and his business associates to recuse from editing articles in
relation to this; and/or to clearly declare a COI when interacting over
them.
As I noted before - this is a hot button issue on Wikipedia, and if not
handled delicately the community is liable to come crashing down like a ton
of bricks on Roger & WMUK. The last thing we need is *another* board member
banned from Wikipedia :S
From my prespective there are serious ethical questions about this
situation. And I think going forward WMUK can't realistically have
any association with the project.
Roger also, I think, needs to clearly engage with the Wikipedia community
over the product/service he is selling and how he will deal with the
ethical/COI situation surrounding that.
Seriously though; how did this situation get so far along without someone
raising concerns!!!
Tom
On 17 September 2012 23:05, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe
<jayen466(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Chris Keating
<
chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I understand the QRpedia software is freely reusable under the MIT
> License, today. In other words – people in Brazil or India are able to use
> the QRpedia technology too, aren't they? And they will always be able to
> use it whenever they want, without ever having to ask the current rights
> holders or Wikimedia UK for permission first, correct?
Correct.
To further clarify - we are not really talking about intellectual
property rights. We are talking about the domains currently used to provide
the qrpedia service, which are
qrpedia.org and
qrwp.org.
Thanks Chris. That makes more sense. :)
Actually, one more question. Chris Owen says on the DYK talk page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Potential_abuse_of…
that Roger is apparently being *paid for the use of these domains*,
which I understand link the users of mobile devices to Wikipedia content.
Does that mean that, once the transfer of these sites to Wikimedia UK is
complete, Wikimedia UK will be charging customers of these sites to
generate revenue? Or will QRpedia thereafter be a free encyclopedia?
Or is Chris Owen altogether mistaken about QRpedia being a paid service?
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org